Government out of control.
Users and abusers* of food stamps can use them to buy Alcohol and cigarettes.
Mikek
At least Florida and Georgia are drug testing welfare recipients and if anyone on unemployment fails a pre-employment drug test, they're off unemployment insurance (under the category of not fit for work). Several states are trying to do the right thing. Obama is fighting them every step of the way, though.
Two facts about the drug screening in Florida:
1) The governor's wife has money in the screening labs 2) Drug use by welfare recipients is lower than that of the general public.
"Shortly before he was inaugurated, Scott's lawyers met with attorneys at the Florida Commission on Ethics. Subsequently, they moved his Solantic holdings into a revocable trust in his wife's name, making her the controlling investor in the privately held company. No public records were created from the ethics meeting."
I love it when tea baggers mention Rick Scott. There isn't a more corrupt politician on the planet.
The program isn't even cost effective:
It is just a transfer of money from tax payers to Rick Scott's pocket. The one percenters love the useful idiots that champion their covert causes. Do this to stop fraud, and oh by the way sucker, this makes me rich.
PT Barnum would love the tea baggers.
Good. Smart woman.
Nonsense. Though it doesn't really matter, does it?
He's already made the deal with the devil for you Democrats (though your souls aren't worth much).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That just confirms that the program is working!
Most of these articles confuse EBT Food Stamps with EBT WELFARE. Two diffirent things.
Food Stamps are not accepted for cigs, booze, nonfood items or even hot prepared food.
Welfare recipients can just withdraw it all as cash, so preventing them from using that EBT for cigs and booze only conceals the problem of stupid personal and spending habits.
Did you know that a Foster contractor can get food stamps without regard to their holdings and income, for each child?
Did I say differently? The point is that they should get *no* assistance if they're on drugs. Public funds should not be used for any recreational activities or to satisfy an addiction. The latter shouldn't *be* a foster contractor (who should be drug tested in any case).
nyone
ttrying
hough.
BFD. How many of the politicians that run these programs have to submit to mandatory drug testing?
None.
It's all "do as I say, not as I do" bullshit.
Mark L. Fergerson
It certainly is! - They're taking my money. - They're often *supposed* to be taking care of children. - They're *supposed* to get a job. - Welfare is a "safety net" not a lifestyle. - They can't get a job if they're on drugs. - Yes, I believe that there should be conditions on accepting my assistance.
You obviously disagree with all of this. You believe welfare is a "right". Nice.
Irrelevant, though I wouldn't be against drug testing for politicians, either. I'm subject to random testing. I certainly have no problem with the issue.
I believe that politicians should be able to use their salary to buy alcohol. I guess with your twisted, moral equivalence, logic, you don't agree. No public sector employee should be able to buy alcohol if welfare recipients can't with their dole, right?
Does this really matter at all? Why is this perceived to be important?
The numbers don't add up at all for one thing: "Over 12 months, the money saved on all rejected applicants would add up to $40,800 to $60,000 for a program that state analysts have predicted will cost $178 million this fiscal year."
UI is a specific benefit paid by the employer on behalf of the laid-off person. I'd think knocking people off UI would be a problem legally. UI is not a welfare program. It's insurance.
-- Les Cargill
Yes, it matters a great deal. I already posted a small number of reasons.
...and your point is?
Nope. If you're too sick to find work, no UI for you. A druggie can't find work, so...
The test for pot. You can't just quit a week before the test and expect to pass. Pot smokers are regular users. They will fail.
Rather the result is the welfare population uses less drugs than the general population. Certainly they use less drugs than your average tea bagger.
I went thorough your posts. I don't see anything.
Look, we'll keep this simple. Scott is a world class douche. Only an ancephalic region like Florida would hire the guy to mow lawns. I don't care if he's a "conservative" or a Stalinist, he's an idiot of the highest sort.
I want to know what Florida gets for the $178 million. FWIW, I moved from the desolation that is Flourdia in 2009. They don't exactly have the money to throw around. Unemployment's down from the 12% it was then at least.
That's mainly because everybody left who isn't pulling on the government teat.
trying
??? All that's required ( though it varies by state ) is a record of applications submitted.
Druggies find work *all the time*. Wall Street is eat up with dopers. Read a bit, you'll be shocked.
-- Les Cargill
NOT SO in WA. Check RCW 74.08.580 as follows:
580(1) Any person receiving public assistance is prohibited from using electronic benefit cards or cash obtained with electronic benefit cards (e) To purchase cigarettes as defined in RCW 82.24.010 or tobacco products as defined in RCW 82.26.010 (f) To purchase any items regulated under Title 66 RCWTitle 66 RCW ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL Will not bore you with the details,but all of it is available online.
Yes, I knew this was California, my mistake for not adding that. Sorry, Mikek
anyone
trying
Politicians "promotions"? AlwaysWrong, you *are* an idiot!
I can't help it if you're blind. I'm not going to repost the list.
I don't much care about your opinion on the matter. How's that grab ya?
Why do you want to know? You said you're no longer a resident.
Obvious nonsense.
trying
though.
Wrong. You have to certify that you're able to work (weekly). If you weren't able to show up for a job you don't get paid that week.
Perhaps you can't read (there's a lot of that going around among you liberals) but the issue is that they've washed out from a potential job *because* of a failed drug test. They are thus incapable of holding that job and are ineligible for UI because of that. Lose a job because of drugs and you don't get UI. Simple. It doesn't sound like that would cost a state $178M, or whatever your silly number is.
AlwaysWrong is, well, always wrong. ...but you knew that.
Against CA state and FEDERAL law! A search for CA state food stamp information,i quote: // quote // What you can buy with food stamps Any food for human consumption except hot food (but remember, there is also an exception for approved restaurant meals programs). Seeds and plants to grow food for yourself or your family. [7 C.F.R. § 271.2]
What you cannot buy [7 C.F.R. § 271.2] Pet food. Alcohol. Non-food items such as soap, toothpaste, toilet paper, cigarettes, etc. Vitamins and medicines. Any hot food, including hot food intended for immediate consumption (with the exception of restaurant meals programs). // end quote //
A "snip" from the indicated CFR states "Eligible foods means: (1) Any food or food product intended for human consumption except alcoholic beverages, tobacco, and hot foods and hot food products prepared for immediate consumption". NOTE the word "except".
Read and recant.
See also "circular reasoning."
The math is out there.
-- Les Cargill
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.